The darker, muted primary colors of Reeve's 'evil' Superman III costume is now the standard tone for modern movie superhero costumes. Now they'd never put a (cinematic) Superman, Spider-Man, et al in a suit as bright and colorful as Reeve's standard suit. Sign of the times.

The darker, muted primary colors of Reeve's 'evil' Superman III costume is now the standard tone for modern superhero costumes. They'd never put Superman, Spider-Man, et al in a suit as bright and colorful as Reeve's standard suit. Sign of the times.

And? It's not like there is a deeper meaning to the bright primary colors of the early (& current) comics - It is there because it was/is simpler to print, and easier to draw/paint. Don't ascribe any deeper meaning to it than that.

Colors invoke emotion, Hyperspace. Brighter colors pop and give off a refreshing, lighthearted sense of fun. Darker colors tend to be more serious and depressing. If that weren't the case, goth kids would be walking around in tie-died shirts with fuchsia lipstick, not black pants with black belts that have black lettering to reflect their black souls while they avoided the sun at all costs.

Colors invoke emotion, Hyperspace. Brighter colors pop and give off a refreshing, lighthearted sense of fun. Darker colors tend to be more serious and depressing. If that weren't the case, goth kids would be walking around in tie-died shirts with fuchsia lipstick, not black pants with black belts that have black lettering to reflect their black souls while they avoided the sun at all costs.

You can philosophize all you want about it, but that does not change the fact about why bright colors were used in comics originally.

The fact that it elicits an emotional response whether you want it to or not pretty much, in my eyes, makes the point about color use in comics a moot point. I have a strange feeling that if they were allowed to use color how they wished, expense be damned, the heroes would still be relegated to the use of bright color while the villains retained darker shades. This reaches into something that resonates in our core for reasons I'm not entirely too sure of, in a nature vs. nurture sense of things (much in the same vein as using lighter notes vs. heavier ones in music).

You can philosophize all you want about it, but that does not change the fact about why bright colors were used in comics originally.

It sure doesn't. My original point was supposed to be about how cinematic costumes have changed, and I edited my post to be more clear.

The image of an angry Reeve above just struck me - those darker reds and blues, meant to show an evil nature in Superman 3, are now de rigueur for Hollywood superheroes. Just look at Reeve's standard suit to those worn by Routh and Cavill. Just an observation.

It's definitely not a doll, since you can see the scale of the suit in the full picture. I'm baffled by why you'd pick a photo of Cage with long hair to photoshop onto the body, though... Were they seriously considering a long-haired Superman? Was that supposed to be some kind of ill-advised Jesus reference?

It's definitely not a doll, since you can see the scale of the suit in the full picture. I'm baffled by why you'd pick a photo of Cage with long hair to photoshop onto the body, though... Were they seriously considering a long-haired Superman? Was that supposed to be some kind of ill-advised Jesus reference?

After the "Death of Superman" story - around when this was being done - Superman had long hair in the comics for a few years.

EDIT: Just read on Wikipedia that Clark had a ponytail. Thank god Burton's Superman never saw the light of day.

Well you see, DC killed off Superman so they could bring him back and make him more relevant and in touch with readers of the time. It's just the people who work there were/are dumb as hell so the only thing they could think up to make him relevant was giving him a fucking mullet.

The Death of Superman was possibly the first major example of the classic let's-have-our-cake-and-eat-it-too comics bait and switch, where they'd set up a major status quo change (usually a death) and then reverse it a year later. Even at the time everyone knew Superman was coming back, which is why the death was so perfunctory. Except they also got an avalanche of media coverage from people who didn't know comics, and didn't know it was all temporary. And the Big Two have been chasing that dragon to ever-diminishing returns ever since.

The Death of Superman was possibly the first major example of the classic let's-have-our-cake-and-eat-it-too comics bait and switch, where they'd set up a major status quo change (usually a death) and then reverse it a year later. Even at the time everyone knew Superman was coming back, which is why the death was so perfunctory. Except they also got an avalanche of media coverage from people who didn't know comics, and didn't know it was all temporary. And the Big Two have been chasing that dragon to ever-diminishing returns ever since.

There was a somewhat similar case ten years earlier when they started to shake up Earth-2 (Batman marrying Catwoman and/or dying; Superman marrying Lois Lane) , and then tried to explain it to the press and confusing everybody. This has been cited a few times as the reason for Crisis, which was sort of the first conscious comics "event"